Gayle in MD
12-02-2011, 10:41 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">GOP Willing To Raise Payroll Taxes On 113 Million Households To Spare 345,000 Millionaires From Tiny Surtax
By Pat Garofalo on Nov 29, 2011 at 4:35 pm

Senate Democrats yesterday introduced legislation — as they’ve been promising to — that would extend a soon-to-expire payroll tax cut, and pay for it by implementing a surtax on income above $1 million. Republicans, of course, are opposing the plan, reviving their false claims that taxing the very wealthiest Americans will hit small businesses and job creators.

In essence, the GOP is saying that it’s willing to allow higher taxes on middle- and lower-income Americans in order to prevent tax increases on the very wealthy. According to an analysis by Citizens for Tax Justice, provided to the Washington Post’s Greg Sargent, the surtax would affect exceedingly few taxpayers, while a payroll tax cut expiration would wallop more than 100 million households:

The surtax would impact around 345,000 taxpayers, roughly 0.2 percent of taxpayers, or one in 500 of them. Those people would pay on average an additional 2.1 percent of their overall income, or just over 1/50th of that overall income, in taxes.

In a majority of states, only one-tenth of one percent, or one in 1,000 taxpayers, would pay this surtax.

And how many people would benefit from the payroll tax cut? According to the group, around 113 million tax filing units — either single workers or families that include more than one worker — would see their payroll tax cut extended. That’s a lot of people — well over 113 million workers, in fact.

Allowing the payroll tax cut to expire at the end of the year would hit middle-class families with a $1,000 tax increase, providing a substantial drag on the economy. In fact, according to Macroeconomic Advisers, allowing the payroll tax cut to lapse “would reduce GDP growth by 0.5 percent and cost the economy 400,000 jobs.” Other estimates are even worse, with Barclays’s estimating that a payroll tax increase could say 1.5 percent off of GDP growth.

The GOP has, time and again, blocked any legislation that would increase taxes by the slightest amount on the ultra-wealthy, even with tax revenue at a 60 year low, taxes on the rich the lowest they’ve been in a generation, and income inequality out of control. Instead, Republicans would prefer to raise taxes on the middle-class, knocking the economy where it can least afford it.



Gayle in MD
12-03-2011, 02:15 AM
More Proof.


Gayle in MD
12-03-2011, 08:19 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"Tonight's votes highlight a sharp contrast between the two parties: Democrats voted to put more money in the pockets of the middle class families who need it most, while Republicans would only support a bill that exacts a price from middle class workers while protecting the wealthiest Americans," Murray, the fourth-ranking Democrat, said.

Democrats pointed to the defection of Republicans from the GOP bill as an embarrassment for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who had predicted there would be support for some sort of payroll tax cut extension.

"Republicans spent this week trying to convince us that they support middle class tax cuts, but tonight a majority of Senate Republicans voted against their own bill -– calling into question whether they support middle class tax cuts at all," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.).

"I was encouraged to see one Republican join Democrats in asking millionaires to pay their fair share," Reid said. "But because every other Republican continues to insist on protecting millionaires, middle class families could face a $1,000 tax increase next year."

Reid has said he will bring the measure back. Most Republican leaders have also said that ultimately the payroll tax cut should be extended, but it was not clear how after Thursday's twin failures.


Amazing, after the Repigs have stood on the lie that tax cuts pay for themselves, for decades, never covered any of their own Bush Tax Cuts, and stated individually, many times, that tax cuts don't have to be paid for, but if they help the Middle Class, Repigs are against them, p[articularly when small business is telloing tghem they need more consumers with some cash to spend, OMG, heaven forbid, that would help the economy, something Repiglicans are determined to prevent, and hence, the Repiglican States are losing the most JOBS.

Truman was right!

12-03-2011, 08:49 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Truman was right!</div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Harry Truman</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"I think one man is just as good as another so long as he's not a n*gger or a Chinaman. Uncle Will says that the Lord made a White man from dust, a nigger from mud, then He threw up what was left and it came down a Chinaman. He does hate Chinese and Japs. So do I. It is race prejudice, I guess. But I am strongly of the opinion Negroes ought to be in Africa, Yellow men in Asia and White men in Europe and America." </div></div>

Was he?